Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

All those threads talking about role-queuing.

As I see it there are three major problems this role-queuing idea is trying to tackle.
1. People who refuse to communicate with the team.
2. People who only play one role and will pick that role even if it is already taken.
3. Getting forced into roles you don't enjoy as much and aren't as good at.
So my question is there a better way to deal with these issues without having to rework the queuing system? The only idea that comes to mind uses another idea I heard about where you can adjust the recommended items to a preplanned build that works most times.(Of course you are not bound to these items so you can always change it if needed) The game will then take the items from your build and show them to your team. (this will allow your team to know where your likely going). If you do not have a changed build it will just show your team the normal recommended build for the champ. So that's my idea on how to fix it without changing the queuing system.

The system is fine as it is. There's no need to change it. "Refusing to communicate with team" is being used as "Person not doing what I tell them to" in this context. People need to learn to accept the players that they're given and try to work around their weaknesses - this is called teamwork. No one can force you to play a role, they can only report you for "refusing to communicate with team" and see my above comment on that.

First and foremost, I'm on my phone so typing with little effort. As fir the idea, I see a few problems..but very few. Less than the current system. People would troll, and pick the tank role as a champ that isn't a tank, for example. You could then respond to that with "only have certain champs in certain roles." Sadly, this won't work either. There are instances where a champ that normally can't fill the role, can do it decently. An example is vladimir. An AP mage with low armor. He can fulfill the solo-top lane with ease though. By stacking AP, you get amazingly high health for a carry. Due to no mana problems, high sustain, and a free poke that heals you, he naturally counters many top champions. A malphite was happy to lane against vlad, only to discover he had to b every wave or two. Cases like this prove it would be very hard to balance the idea.

Great suggestions so far. I hope Riot pays attention to this thread because Role Matchmaking, in my opinion, would be a great idea. People will troll, they will, but I feel that matchmaking in a role would and could give players the chance to practice lanes in a real game on a consistent basis. Players could also report players who trolled a role, like taking Lux into the jungle or something, with an added report option. If players acquire a certain amount of these reports, I see no reason why they should be banned for a period of time. I also hope that it would allow better team coordination because players would feel satisfied with their role entering a game. I thought it would at least be a great idea for normal drafts, where people, generally, like to be a little more serious but still have fun playing the current meta. I feel that creativity or different play styles or right out meta shattering tactics would be more viable in a blind pick or ranked; ranked because people want to win and would most likely not kill their chances of it and blind pick because it is really just for the fun of it (one can essentially just screw meta strategy). Moving on, I cannot tell you how many times I have entered champion select with people who are so stuck on a role they'd double mid or worse just to play that role. But I understand their frustration, they could have gone through so many games just wanting to play a certain lane. Perhaps extremely specific roles would be too complicated, but I see no reason why just matchmaking into a certain lane would be a problem; that way people can still discuss the logistics from there on, ex. Who will tank, carry, and so on. From a technical standpoint, I am not sure how hard this would be but I for one would love a role choice in matchmaking. Hope this thread gets some more attention, great ideas all.

I'm sad Pogo. You didn't respond to my last post. I didn't expect you to have to agree to do it, but I'd like an answer either way!

Okay... Time to reread these posts.

@ morophobutterfly: I like the idea of an editable recommended build, and even that other people can see it. However, it really wouldn't change much in regards to having a streamlined system for picking champions before the game starts. But you hinted you knew as much in your post so you probably already know that.

Also, people could put down a normal balanced AP carry build and then go 6 deathfire grasps to troll. Which isn't really a problem either because trolls gonna troll that way regardless. I still would REALLY like an editable recommended build row.

@ TvorRyn: Your idea is a lot like mine. Mine is have an optional role queue, throw people who role queue on the same team and throw people who don't on the same team (for ease of experimentation,) but they can play against each other, (for lower queue times.) Have this be a checklist of roles your willing to play and not just picking a single role from a list to throw you into the queue, (this lets people pick as few or many roles as they want. Those with more roles will have quicker queues, those with less risk longer ones. All depends on the price you're willing to pay.)

So yeah, well thought out wo/man.

@ Mageinta Warrior: Tvor already answered you but I just want to give my four and a half cents. I think of a report system for champ selection with mixed feelings. On the one hand, people would abuse the report for "Not playing picked role." mistakenly for "Well, he's playing something unconventional, kill with fire." And I get that, but on the other hand, the Tribunal judges aren't dumb. People think they are, but they aren't. They'll know the difference. Especially if Riot drills it into them before a system like this goes live. Which is what they'd do if they were smart. Which they are.

But you know this, because you said as much in your post. On ranked not being about playing the meta, I agree, which is why we're still throwing ideas out. Maybe instead of having role queue for ranked, it's an optional setting across the board that goes off a list of preferred roles. People can see this list when they click on you in champ select.

Lastly I agree with your last post that the system is fine as is. It doesn't really affect me at all, since I play every role anyway. But that's kinda selfish thinking on my part. For others, as I see it, an optional system that groups role queuers on the same team as roll queuers and experimenters on the same team as experimenters would actually do a lot to help create new metas instead of hindering creativity.

P.S. I've accepted trolls into my life. They don't live up to Trundle though.

While I thought this was a good idea at first also, like ALOT of people. Im going to have to go back on it. It's actualy a bad idea and won't solve anything. Forcing a certain meta game to be played kills any other meta's that could change the whole game around.

On a side note, OP you sound really upset about the fact that there are so many threads about it. LOLZ!!!!!!!!!!